Like the Titanic, the 1996 disaster atop Mount Everest has exerted an
irresistable pull on the public imagination. Krakauer's book expands
on his own piece from Outside magazine & it was subsequently
made into a TV movie. To this day, charges and countercharges are
still flying back & forth (see Salon
Magazine)

At the time of the 1996 expedition that Krakauer accompanied, 130 people
had died on Everest since 1921. That's about 1 in 4 of those making
the attempt. However, in 1985 a professional climber escorted amatuer Dick
Bass to the top & opened the Mountain to commercial exploitation by
pros leading guided trips. As Weathers Beck, a 49 year old pathologist
from Krakauer's group, says, "Assuming you're reasonably fit and have some
disposable income (as much as $75,000), I think the biggest obstacle is
probably taking time off from your job and leaving your family for two
months." One of the guides tells Krakauer, "We've got the big E figured
out, we've got it totally wired. These days, I'm telling you, we've
built a yellow brick road to the summitt."

Of course, no God could allow such hubris to go unpunished & the
rest of the book details that much deserved punishment.

But one question, & perhaps the most important one, goes unanswered;
What business do these people have even trying to climb Mount Everest?
Krakauer is 41 years old & his marriage has nearly foundered in the
past because of his devotion to climbing. He says that he began to
climb because "Achieving the summit of a mountain was tangible, immutable,
concrete. The incumbent hazards lent the activity a seriousness of
purpose that was sorely missing from the rest of my life." One almost
pities a person who finds climbing to be the most concrete thing in their
life.

At one point, discussing Beck's desire to climb, Krakauer says that,
"Selfish and grandiose though Beck's obsession may have been, it wasn't
frivolous." This seems to me to be quite wrong. I side with
Krakauer's wife, who stayed behind in Seattle & told him, "Saying goodbye
to you was one of the saddest things I've ever done. I guess I know
on some level that you might not be coming back, and it seemed so f***ing
stupid and pointless." Well, he made it back, but for those
who didn't, it's hard to call their deaths anything but pointless.

GUEST REVIEW by Andrew Geller:

Most of us have endured guided tours gone awry -- buses broken down,
incompetent guides, promised attractions covered with scaffolding -- but
rarely are the stakes higher than wasted time. When the tour guides
are the world's best mountaineers and the object of the tour is Everest,
the highest mountain in the world, the stakes are mortality.

Krakauer treats us to an autobiographical account of the horrendous
combination of nature, technology, and hubris that lead to the deaths of
eight people, including 2 guides. Like Krakauer's earlier work, Into
the Wild, Into Thin Air is as much an examination of self and responsibility
as a description of the personalities and events leading to the deaths.
One of the most interesting aspects of this book and his previous one is
the admission that climbing mountains and taking mortal chances are
purely selfish acts. Oneself may be changed by the act; others in one's
life would be affected more by the death of the climber than by the success
of the climb.

The climbing season described in the book may be the best documented
Himalayan season of all time. In addition to another account of the
same event in Anatoli Boukreev's The
Climb: Tragic Ambitions on Everest, articles and columns by Krakauer
in Outside magazine,
and pieces in other magazines by the individuals involved, the brilliant
IMAX presentation of Everest by David Brashears vividly shows the mountain
during that season and touches on the tragedy.

GRADE: B+

GUEST REVIEW by Neil Goldstein:

"Into Thin Air", along with The
Climb: Tragic Ambitions on Everest (same story, different perspective)
are two fascinating accounts of a high-altitude climbing expedition gone
wrong. It's about heroes, goats, martyrs and the age-old question of what
would you do when given the opportunity to risk your own life to save others.
Further elements which come into question are how responsible is an individual
to save another one's life in a life-threatening situation when the action
is both caused by unforseen disasters and the sloppiness and fervor to
achieve an impractical and insane goal.

Both books are expertly written, surprisingly, and had an absolute effect
on me from page one to the end, and even now, two weeks later. I
highly recommend each book on all your "must read now" lists.

GRADE: A+

GUEST REVIEW by David Sandberg:

Societal Decay at 30,000 feet: A Review of Into Thin Air

Having read this book over a year ago and therefore
having some time to reflect on its meanings has given me some considered
insight into the experiences of John Krakauer and his companions who sought
to scale the world's highest mountain, and into the disaster which followed.
Decadence in society does not happen over night. As Rome was not built
in a day - so it did not decline in that space of time. Into Thin Air has
an important societal message - one which compels all of us to stop, look,
amd reflect at length on the responsibilities of human beings to each other,
and to society as a whole. The group of mountaineers who climbed
Mt Everest were an interesting bunch to say the very least.
Societies in decay lose themslves in the unsavory and in thrills. They
revert to gladiatorial combats, jackpot lotteries, overt and immodest sexual
habits, and thrill sports which titilate andrenalin addicts. The climbers
of Mount Everest certainly fit into that excitement-high addiction pattern.
Mt Everest had been climbed many times before this party made their way
up the mountain. Indeed, reading the book, one has the sense that the enterprise
was a circus show with multiple teams climbing simultaneously and guide
businesses established to insure that people be brought up the mountain
and down again on a sight seeing basis. What had been an awesome
human achievement made by Sir Edmund Hillary
had been turned into a for-profit vacation package complete with email.
Mt Everest, like all of North America, had been strip malled - turned
into a commercial venture - the thrill of a lifetime for a few paltry thousands
of dollars. One of the climbers, New York socialite and chatelaine Sharon
Pitman, literally paid to have herself dragged up the mountain by sherpas
replete with current Vanity Fair in hand. Many would say that it was the
thrill of the challenge that drove these men and women up Everest. Perhaps.
Mt Everest had been turned into Disney Land. And Mt Everest hit back. Many
died on the mountain needlessly and tragically.

There is a real feeling of decadence
in this book as well as misfortune.

GRADE: B

Guest Review from Wingnut:

John Krakauer does two things well. He illustrates a situation
in a way that makes you feel like you are there. He also empathasizes
with his characters so much that, in many cases, the reader begins to share
that empathy. In this case, though, he is misguided. Why should
we identify with the real life people in ITA? We shouldn't, simply because
they are/were morons. Having $70,000 does not make one an elite mountain
climber. And lets face it, a mountain whos summit-to-death ratio
is about 5:1 is an elite one. The reason there is a book is because
there were plenty of bodies on the top of Everest, not because there was
a storm. That kind of storm happens weekly and good climbers know when
to get the fuck out.

On the other hand it was a phenomenal story. I sometimes wonder
if Dan Quayle could have written the story well, just because the
material is there. It's like a pass from Joe Montana--don't drop
it. Krakauer didn't drop it and may have gained some yards after
the catch. His technical expertise helped out immensely here.
Another writer would just have told
the human story and mentioned Everest in reverent yet obtuse terms.
Krakauer mixed in the minutia of filling a backpack with the beauty and
tragedy of the scene.

Overall I give it a B+ and an A for the Mountain. Also recommended:
"Everest" the Imax movie. You get a really good idea of
how big those hills are and how small we are, although if you know
the story, they do an awful lot of over-explaining.

I agree with everything you've said, and for
the last six years or so
have been a vocal opponent at American Alpine
Club Board meetings
regarding guiding rich folks--like Beck Weathers
and Sandy Hill
Pittman on Himalayan peaks. Guided trips
on Rainier, Shasta and in
the Sierras is one thing, but in the Himalayas
it's a much different
endeavor because all humans--guides included--become
relatively
worthless as saviors (if needed) when in the
Death Zone. I actually
had this debate with Scott Fisher, who I knew
pretty well, back in
1994 in Salt Lake City. His view was
that guiding was his livelihood,
and who are others to pass judgement upon
a legal way to make a living
which had, until 1996, a reasonably good safety
record. Were they
playing Russian Roulette, who knew/knows?

That being said, given the crowds on Himalayan
peaks (mostly trekkers,
not climbers), I was and am still of the view
that those who go there
should first pay their climbing dues, as it
were, such as by going on
non-guided (or actually leading) expeditions
into South America,
Alaska, Mexico, and other 20,000 peaks (all,
by the way, of which I
did prior to my non-guided Everest trip).
Unfortunately, with
Krakauer's book, Everest has been popularized
as a trophy mountain,
and the book is having the unfortunate effect
of leading more people
to go there who are better suited for a KOA
campground, at best (and
McKinley too, which had a dramatic increase
in accidents this year
over past years).

That being said, Juice, you didn't review the
book, but instead
reviewed the wisdom of Jon and other clients
going to Everest in the
first place. Your criticism of all of
them seems to be that they
strayed from your view of a Normal Rockwellian
lifestyle they should
have led (see the last two paragraphs of the
review). This may sound
unbelievable to you, but as one who knows
several hundred climbers,
including all the household names such as
Hillary and Messner, it is
not surprising, let alone pitiful, that they
put this as one of their
top priorities. Most climbers I know
work in order to pay for
climbing trips. I agree it's sorta silly
sounding, but then, it's not
much different than a pro baseball player
or a famous musician on the
road year-round and training when not--just
people devoting efforts to
what they do best. That's the problem
with amateurs and guided
Himalayan jaunts, it brings into the sport
people into living a
fantasy or legend that can get themselves
killed. A nit--at the end
of the second paragraph summit is misspelled.

Best,
GKM

PS--I'll be on K2 next year.

Orrin Responds:

Thanks.

I agree with much your criticism of my review. But I started from
the
assumption that it was well written. What I wanted from the book
was some sense
of why they were there & why it was worth it. I didn't really
feel like
Krakauer did a good job of conveying that & that leaves the feeling
that it
wasn't worth it.

I actually didn't raise one of my biggest questions. If the point
of climbing
is to challenge yourself & face danger & work as a team to
overcome enormous
obstacles & all that jazz, then how can you possibly justify leaving
your fellow
climbers on the mountain to die, while you head for safety?
It seems like
part of the deal is that you risk your own life to get everyone down.

Much of the cultish nature of the climbing fraternity seems to be based
on a
kind of macho risk-taker ethos, not unlike an elite military unit.
How do we
reconcile this machismo with the decision to bug out & leave the
dead & dying
behind.

Mathiessen, Peter-The
Snow Leopard (memoir of a search for the Himalayan Snow Leopard)

Maughm, W. Somerset-The
Razor's Edge (WWI survivor searches for himself in the Mountains)

Comments:

how can you possibly pass judgements upon others' actions of what they did and did not do in an extreme, deadly situation that you will probably never be in. i mean, we would all love to be as heroic as you, but some of us enjoy thinking with our heads. if you're running out of ox. (or are completely out) in the death zone, with little or no energy left, with frostbitten hands and have the choice to save yourself, or remain there with someone else and probably both die, what would you do? though ox. deprived and their brains barely functioning, i think they most made intelligent choices. as to the beginning of the trip and some of the choices that were made then, i tend not to agree with. the ego driven choices, the money driven decisions, the 65k price tag as to which the richest, most inexperienced climbers can afford, but then have to be hoiseted up the mountain by someone else, i agree with you on all those. but when things got really bad and it was a matter of life and death, saving yourself or someone else, to pass judgements on them is just ridiculous and seems so "holier than thou". what about rob hall who refused to go down the mountain when told to but chose to wait with his friend (doug hansen i think his name was) who was completely incapacitated and because of that both of them lost their lives? what about anitoli and the sherpas who went back up the mountain several times, risking their lives during rescue attempts in the middle of the storm and ended up draggin two people all the way down the mountain to safety? my guess is that you didn't read the book at all.